Skip to main content

Full text of "The myth of the Jewish menace in world affairs; or, The truth about the forged Protocols of the elders of Zion"

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/| 












MACMILLAN & CO., Lwitbd 
vanxm • bombat • Calcutta 














Copyright 1921 

Set up and Electrotyped. Published February, 1921 

**It would not he easy to say how large a part of our troiiblea in the 
present troubUms times is due to the general discredit that has over^ 
taken the old British virtue of honesty J' 

The Morning Post (in a lucid interval of subjectivity), 

August 28, 1920. 


The substance of the following three easaya vrae 
originally contributed, in the form of independent 
articles to the Manchester Guardian, the Spectator, and 
the Daily Telegraph respectively. They have been 
carefully revised, much amplified, and largely rewritten 
in order to make a connected argument and avoid 
repetition. Footnotes of authorities have been added. 
My grateful acknowledgments are due to the Editors 
of the Manchester Guardian, the Spectator, and the 
Daily Telegraph for their kindness in permitting this 

I confess to a feehng of shame at having to write 
this pamphlet at all. That reputable newspapers in 
this country should be seeking to transplant here the 
seeds of Prussian anti-Semitism, and that they should 
employ for this purpose devices so questionable and a 
literature so melodramatically silly, cannot but cause 
a sense of humihation to any self-respecting Enghsh- 
maa. It is for this reason that I have strictly limited 
myself to an examination of the specific charges formu- 
lated by these publications. I cannot bring myself to 
believe that it is necessary to deal with them on a 

L. W. 

Qray's Inn, Loodoa, W.C. 
Novtmbar, 1930. 



The prodigious essay on "The Cause of World 
Unrest" which the Morning Post has lately published 
in seventeen articles and some sixty columns of printed 
matter' is a document on which the student of political 
thought in England will dwell sadly. Over a century 
ago, in world circumstances of startling similarity and 
almost from the same party standpoint, Burke gave 
us, in his "Causes of the Present Discontents," his 
"Reflections," and his "Regicide Peace" a large and 
stately piece of pohtical philosophy. To-day the 
leading organ of Conservative opinion in this countty 
can only expound a sort of pohtical demonology, bor- 
rowed partly from the obscurantists of Bourbon 
Clericalism and partly from the fanatics of Hohen- 
zollem Anti-Semitism. It would be merciful to pass 
by this strange effort in silence, but unfortunately 
there is reason to beheve that, with all its grotesque- 

' Morning Post, July 12-30, 1920. 


ness, it is calculated to work a good deal of mischief. 
Credulous and vicious people are still abundant, and 
they are not confined to the crowd. Mr. Winston 
Churchill haa darkly hinted that he reads the signs of 
the times much in the same way aa the Morning Post, 
and a curious story is current that the translation of 
the Russian forgery on which the theory of that journal 
mainly rests was actually made in the Intelligence De- 
partment of the War Office. Then there are Mr- 
Chesterton and Mr. Belloo and quite a conventicle of 
smaller fry who have been vainly preaching the same 
apocalypse for years. The Morning Post may bring 
them recruits, and that ^suredly is not desu-able. 

The theory of the Morning Post may bo briefly 
stated. Its fundamental contention is that all political 
unrest is artificial. It is a product of the Hidden Hand 
which ia now revealed to us aa a "Formidable Sect" 
encompas^g the world. Ttiis sect has been at its 
present work for at least a hundred and fifty yeare, 
The French Revolution was contrived by it, as well as 
all the subordinate revolutions down to our own time. 
Trade Unioniam, Socialism, Syndicalism, Bolshevism, 
Sinn Fein, Indian NationaUsm, and their analogues in 
every part of the ^obe are outward and visible signs 
of its sinister activity. That there are social grievances 
and even evils at the root of this unrest is not denied, 
but they are as artificial as the unrest itself. They 
have all been dehberately brought about by the Hidden 
Hand in order to stir up revolt against the Throne and 
Altar. The way in which it has been done is a littlt 
complicated. Behind the restless and seditious move- 
ments which we all know there is a secret revolutionary 



organisation in the shape of Freemasonry. But this is 
only intermediate, for Freemasonry itself, through some 
obscure transaction between the Templars and the Old 
Man of the Mountain, was created by the "Formidable 
Sect," and is wholly, though perhaps unconsciously, 
under its control. Freemasoruy had a specially "activ- 
ist" wing in the lUuminati — also an invention of the 
Formidabhats — which was chiefly responsible for the 
French Revolution. 

Now, what is this "Formidable Sect"? It is no 
other than the Jews. Those ancient enemies of the 
hmnan race appear to have been even more daring 
and djmamic in evil-doing than even Torquemada sup- 
posed. Throughout their world-wide Dispersion they 
have secretly preserved their old pohtical organisation, 
and they have used it — and are still using it — with 
deadly persistency to overturn the established Chris- 
tian order of things and to found in its place a uni- 
versal Jewish dominion under the sceptre of a Sovereign 
of the House of David. The Jews are, in short, the 
"cause of the world unrest." 

There is nothing new in this theory except the claim 
of its authors to have produced documentary proof of 
its final development — that is, of its Jewish aspect, 
QuA international conspiracy, it was invented over a 
century ago, as it has been resurrected to-day, to ex- 
plain the unfamihar international character of the 
prevailing unrest. The clergy and the nobihty of the 
anden regime were as little capable as the Morning Post 
to-day of imderatanding the natiu'al causes of this 
phenomenon. And yet they were by no means obscure. 
The French Revolution, as Burke pointed out, was not 




a mere uprising against local oppression, but a "revolu- 
tion of doctrine and theoretic dogma"' which was 
bound to find echoes beyond the French frontiers. In 
this respect it resembled the E«formation, and also 
that other "armed doctrine" which we know as Bol- 
shevism. Nevertheless it puzzled the Bourbon apolo- 
giata, and, confusing cause and effect, they became con- 
vinced that they were in tlie presence of an international 

The theory was first propounded by a Superior of the 
Seminary of Eudists at Caen in 1790,° but it was after- 
wards vastly developed by the Abb^ Barruel in liis 
"M^moires sior le Jacobinisme," by Robison of Edin- 
burgh in his "Proofs of a Conspiracy," and by the 
Chevalier de Malet in his tedious "Recherches His- 
toriques," Their conclusion was that there was a triple 
conspiracy of Philosophers, Freemasons, and Illuminati, 
who formed an actual sect aiming deliberately and 
methodically at the overthrow of the estabhshed 
religions and governments throughout Europe, It is 
noteworthy that their researches failed to discern any 
Jewish element in this conspiracy, though in minute- 
ness of investigation and in the gluttony of their 
credulity they were by no means inferior to the Morning 
Post, while they had the advantage over that journal of 
being in close touch with the facts. The theory had a 
short shrift, though the industry of its authors cer- 
tainly did much to throw light on the organisation and 
activities of the secret societies. So far as the Free- 

' "Thoughta on French Affairs" (Burke'e Worke, Vol. UI., p. 
■ GenSeman'a Magaane, June, 1791. 



masons and lUuminati were concerned, it waa easily 
demolished by the Earl of Moira, who at a meeting of 
the Grand Lodge of England in 1800 showed con- 
vincingly that it was a mare's nest,' As for the 
Philosophers, no one ever took the charge against them 
seriously. For half a century scarcely anything more 
was heard of this aspect of the "Formidable Sect," 
though meanwhile the Revolutions of 1830 and 1848 
took place. The non-suit of Barruel was chose jugie. 

It was revived in the sixties under the influence of 
the rehgious passions kindled by the war for Itahan 
unity. The struggle for Jewish emancipation had 
triumphed all over Western Europe, largely as a con- 
sequence of the Revolutions of 1848, and the new citi- 
zens thus enfranchised had everywhere cast in their 
lot with the Liberal parties. This was swiftly and 
angrily noted by the Ultramontane polemista, and the 
old bogey of a "Formidable Sect" began to haunt them 
in a revised and enlarged form. In the new conspiracy 
there was no longer any talk of Philosophers and Ulu- 
minati. Their place was taken by Jews and Protes- 
tants. The "Formidable Sect" thus became a triple 
alliance of Freemasons, Jews, and Protestants, which 
was said to be directed by the "Grand Master Pal- 
merston," and supported by the whole British people, 
not only as Protestants, but as descendants of the Lost 
Tribes of Israel. The chief protagonist of this stu- 
pendous hallucination was M. Gougcnot des Mous- 
seaux, who in 1869 embodied it in a volume entitled 
"Le Juif, le Judaisme, et la Judaisation des Peuples 
Chretie ns." From his own admissions, however, it 

' /rrfro p. 14. 


appears that he waa largely indebted to German 
Catholic inapiration. Once again the theory failed to 
find support, and Gougenot's book, like the books of 
Barruel and Robison, became relegated to the litera^ 
ture of forgotten crazes. 

Later on attempts to revive it were made by M, de 
Saint-Andr^, the Abb6 Chabauty, M. Drumont, M. 
Martin, and M. Copin-AlbancelH, in the full flood of 
the Anti-Semitic agitation which had been importexl 
into France from Germany. The only notable addition 
made to the theory by these writers was the hypothesis 
of a secret Jewish Government, transported from Jeru- 
salem into the Diawpora, wliich, throughout the ages, 
has never ceased to command the allegiance of an 
imaginary international Jewry, to keep it disloyal to 
all other Governments, and to direct it in an insidious 
campaign against the established order of Christian 
Society. Since 1909 the agitation has become retrana- 
ferred to the headquarters of Clerical Anti-Semitism 
in Vienna and Munich, and the most recent works on 
the subject — with which the Morning Post appears to 
have mainly worked, although for obvious reasons it 
does not acknowledge them — are Wichtl's "Weltfrei- 
maurerei, Weltrevolution, Weltrepublik," Meister's 
"Judas Schuldbuch," and Rosenberg's "Die Spur des 
Juden im Wandel der Zeiten," all published in 1919. 
All this literature, whUe expounding exactly the same 
theory of a Judeo-Masonic conspiracy as the Morning 
Post, is as \nolently anti-English as it is anti-Masonic 
and anti-Jewish. A great deal of it is published under 
the auspices of the PewtecWand'sJSrTieiwrtmj; Committee, 
of which Mr, Houston Chamberlain is a leading spirit. 



This, then, ie the very dubious raw material of the 
theory hashed up by the Morning Post as a seriouB con- 
tribution to the grave political preoccupations of British 
statesmanship at this moment. It will be noted that in 
the forms so far reviewed it is confessedly a theory, 
resting at the best on evidence of a highly conjectural 
and cirtumstantial character. The novelty in its latest 
presentation is that an eiTort is made to bolster it up 
with what is claimed to be direct evidence. This takes 
the form of a document entitled "The Protocols of the 
Learned Elders of Zion," which was opportunely pub- 
lished in an anonymous pamphlet a few months ago 
by Messrs. Eyre and Spottiswoode. These protocols 
are alleged to be the minutes of certain meetings of the 
Secret Directory of the Jewish people held in Paris 
towards the end of the last century, and they pretend 
to record avowals by the "Elders" of the very con- 
spiracy set forth hypothctically by MM. Gougenot des 
Mousseaux and Ccpin-Albancelli. The joy of the 
Morning Post at the discovery of this evidence is not 
difficult to understand. Its theory threatened to col- 
lapse under the weight of its inherent grotesqueness, 
and here, in the nick of time, was documentary proof, 
complete and apparently irrefutable. "In this book," 
says the Post triumphantly, "for the first time we find 
an open declamtion of the terrible conspiracy of the 
'Formidable Sect.'" ' 

Unhappily for the Mm-ning Post, this document la a 
forgery, and one which has already been used for evMi 
more disreputable purposes than the bolstering up of 
the maUcious hypothesis in support of which it is citdd. 

' Morning Poal, July 16, 1020. 


The story of this forgery will be told presently.' For 
the moment I content myself with noting that it is a 
forgery, and proceed to examine briefly the main his- 
torical propositions which it is invoked to corroborate 
and co-ordinate. This is necessary not because they 
are in themselves worth taking seriously, but because 
they are held to react on the forged protocols and to 
supply presumptive evidence of their genuineness. 

I take the propositions in the logical order of the 
argument they are put forward to illustrate: — 


This proposition, borrowed, for the most part, from 
the wild conjectures of Copin-Albancelli, has a queer 
flavour of the anti-Catholic bogey which was at one 
time so fiercely exploited by Hot-gospellers, and in 
which even Mr. Gladstone believed as late as 1874 — 
the Pope standing for the Prince of the Captivity and 
the Syllabus for the Protocols of Nilus. What, however, 
is very remarkable is that the protagonists of tliis fan- 
tastic calumny are, for the most part, Roman Catholics 
who have themselves suffered from it in a form much 
more difficult to grapple with. The short answer to it in 
the case of the Jews is tliat it is an invention, and that 
not only is there no trace of it in the history of the Dis- 
persion, but that, on the contrary, the Jews, even as a 
Church, and still more in their secular relations, have 
suffered more from the want of international organ isa- 
tion and uniformity than any other Church or reUgious 
conununity. The Princes of the Captivity, for example, 
E confined to the Babylonian Exile, and were httle 

' Iiijra pp. 19 tl Hq. 



more than the local Presbyters omnium JudcBorum 
Angliai of Angevin England or the Presidents of tha 
Jewish Consistory of modem France. The allegation 
that the final aim of thia Secret Government is the 
establishment of a universal Jewish dominion under a 
Prince of the House of David is a curious muddle of 
fflchatology and politics. With much better reason the 
early Anabaptists said virtually the same thing of the 
iloman Cathohc Church, and, indeed, on the Morning 
Post plan of campaign, it might be retorted on all the 
great Churches. With the Jews it has no more to do 
with practical politics than the analogous hopes of 
pious Christendom. The Morning Post, however, does 
not stand alone in its error. A curious variant of it is 
found in recent German Antisemitica. The World 
Unrest is there pictured as due to a conspiracy of 
Jewry and the British Empire, based on the Anglo- 
Israelitish theory that the British people are the Lost 
Tribes and the Royal House of Windsor the authentic 
seed of David. Accordingly, Britons and Jews together 
are accused of having plotted the late war in order to 
fulfil the Messianic prophecies in the person of King 
George.' Les grands esjrrits se rencontrentJ 


It follows that if there is no "Secret Government of 
the Jewish Nation," such a Government cannot well 
be "the occult power which works behind Freema- 

' See Wichtl and Meiafer op. cii. A peculiarly crazy statement 
of thia theory, illuatrated by an obscene chart pedigree of Queea 
Victoritt, will be found in Semi-Imperalor (Munich, 1019). C/. 
Proceedinga of the BritiBh Israel World Federation Congress, 
July 5-10, 1920. 


aonry." ' The Morning Post, however, is very careful 
to hedge on this, as on many other points. Its alterna- 
tive theory is that Freemasonry is Judaical because it 
ia descended from the Templars, who received their 
Jewish traditions from the Assassins.^ The only foun- 
dation for the suggestion that the Assassins could act 
as intermediaries between the Jews and the Templars 
is, on the one hand, that they were Ishmaelites, and 
consequently "first cousins" to the Jews, and, on the 
other, a much disputed hypothesis of Von Hammer, 
that certain Templars were initiated into the mysteries 
of the Assassins.^ The truth is that the Assassins 
were not Ishmaehtes, except in the figurative sense 
that all Mohammedans claim to be descended from 
Ishmael, and even if they were, they had no contact 
with Jews, and their tenets bear no trace of Jewish 
influence. Consequently, whatever else the Templars 
may have learnt from them, they certainly did not 
learn Judaism, The nearest approach to a tradition 
of Hebrew influence on Templarism is found in a very 
dubious legend of Swedish Masonry which alleges that 
certain Templars of Jerusalem received the secrets of 
the Essenes from seven Syrian Christians whom they 
rescued from the Saracens.* But if this story were 
true, the secrets thus taught would assuredly have 
been more Christian than Jewish. To anyone, how- 
ever, who knows anything of mediaival history, and the 
relations of Moslems and Jews at this period, the whole 

■ MoTfiing Po»t, July 14, 1920. > Ibid. 

* Quoted by Frost, "Secret Societies of ttie Buropeaa Revolu- 
tion." Vol. I., p. 6. 

* Frost, op. cU., pp. 12-13. 



of this conjecture is the crudest buffoonery. No section 
of the Crusaders dealt with the Jews except by way of 
massacre. Moreover, had there been the slightest 
ground for believing that the Templars had Judaiaed 
it would have been seized upon as the most damning 
of aU crimes alleged against them when the Order was 
suppressed. But throughout the comprehensive in- 
dictment, which ranges from the Gnostic heresy to 
gross hcentiousness, there is no hint of the deadly sin 
of Judaism. 


This, however, is not the end of the matter. Yet 
other historical testimonies are alleged — the Temple 
cultus in Freemasonry, the "Jewish Ritual" of the 
Order, and the direct activities of Jews in its anti- 
mooarehical and anti-Christian machinations. 

(a) The first of these arguments may best be judged 
by the Morning Post's own witnesses. Whether Free- 
masonry was or was not derived from the Templars 
and whether or not the Templars became infect«d 
with Jewish ideas transmitted through the Assassins, 
nothing is more certain than that the founders of 
TempUrism established their Order on the Temple 
cultus long before they could have known anything 
of the Assassins, and while they were still impeccable 
Knights of the Cross. Hence, if the Freemasons took 
tiie Temple from them, it was innocent of Jewishness. 
But Robisou — one of the main authorities of the 
Morning Post — will not even have it that the Free- 
masons were indebted to the Templars, much less to 
the Jews. He states that the theory, and even the 


Temple cultue, were unknown to Freemasonry before 
1743, when they were introduced to them for the 
first time by the Jacobite, Andrew Ramsay.' 

(b) The so-called "Jewish Ritual" of Masonry is 
equally a delusion, as the Morning Post could have 
found out for itself, had it taken the trouble to con- 
sult somebody who knows Hebrew and Hebrew 
hterature. The grammatical forms and the trana- 
hteration of the limited nmnber of Hebrew words 
found in the Masonic rituals prove conclusively their 
non-Jewish origin. The legendary matter, too, has 
but few traces of Jewish provenance, and is clearly 
not due to Jewish redaction. If the rituals were 
Jewish, one might expect to find parallel passages in 
the Hebrew Prayer-Book and similar literature, but 
nothing of the kind is discoverable. It is really 
remarkable that Jews had nothing to do — and indeed, 
I believe, never have had anything to do — with the 
composition of the Masonic rituals, seeing that the 
lodges, in this country, at least, have always been 
open to them, and at an early date learned Jews were 
interested in them and possibly joined them; but 
BO it is. The true explanation of the Hebrew ele- 
ments in Freemasonry, as in Templarism, is that 
both borrowed from the Old Testament, as a Chris- 
tian document, 

(c) As for the activities of Jews in the anti-mon- 
archical and anti-Christian machinations of Masomy, 
the answer is that orthodox Masonry has never been 
anti-m onarchical or anti-Christian, and if there have 

' Robiaon: "Proofs of a Conapiracy AgaJDst all the Religions 
and Govemmenta of Europe" (Lond., 1797), pp. 38-39, 


been spurious lodges open to this reproach, and if 
orthodos lodges have been improperly used for this 
purpose, they were, at any rate, free of the added 
reproach of Jewish control or inspiration. The only 
evidence on this head cited by the Morning Post — 
or, rather, by Mrs. Webster on its behalf — is that a 
Jew known by the nickname of Piccolo Tigre issued 
a scandalously anti-social manifesto to the Pied- 
montese Alta Vendita in 1822, and that he was 
abetted by "others of his race."' We are not told 
who these "others" were, nor even what Piccolo 
Tigre's real name was. If Mrs. Webster does not 
know bis name, how can she know that he was a 
Jew? The answer is that she got the story from 
Gougenot des Mousseaux, but even he naively admits 
that he never knew who Piccolo Tigre was.* And 
yet he is positive he was a Jew. This is typical of all 
the Morning Post's evidence. 


If the Freemasons think it worth while, they will, no 
doubt, reply to the Morning Post through a better- 
qualified member of the Craft than myself,^ but, 
unlike the Jews, they can afford to treat the supersti- 
tions with which they are assailed with contempt. 

' Morning Po»t, July 15, 1920. Bee also S'pectaior, June 19 and 
26, 1920. 

• Gougenot dea Mouseeaux, op. cil., p. 343. 

' Since this was writMa a learned and compFehenBive reply haa 
been publiehed, demolishing the whole Masonic side of the M</m- 
itin Post's argumeot. (See A. W. WaJte: "Occult Freemasonry 
ftnd the Jewish Peril" in the Occult Review, Sept., 1920.) 


It will suffice here to quote what Lord Moira said on 
the subject in 1800: — 

"Certain modern publications have been holding forth to 
the world the society of Masona as a league against eonstitu- 
tjonal authorities — an imputation the more secure because 
the Icnown conatitutiona of our fellowship make it certain that 
no answer can be published. It is not to be disputed that in 
countries where impolitic prohibitions restrict tiie communi- 
cation of sentiment, the activity of the human mind may, 
among other means of baffling the control, have resorted to 
the artifice of borrowing the denomination of Freemasons, to 
cover meetings for seditious purposes, just as any other de- 
scription might be assumed for the same object. But, in the 
firat place, it is the invaluable distinction of this free country 
that such a just intercourse of opinions exists without restraint 
as cannot leave to any number of men the desire of forming 
or frequenting those disguised societies where dangerous dis- 
positions may be imbibed. And, secondly, the profhgate doc- 
trines wluch may have been nurtured in any such self-estab- 
lished assemblies could never have been tolerated for a 
moment in any lodge meeting under regular authority. We 
aver, therefore, that not only such laxity of opinion has no 
sort of connection with the tenets of Masonry, but is diametri- 
cally opposite to the injunction which we regard as the foun- 
dation-stone of the lodge, namely. Fear God and honour the 
King." ' 

To this it should be added that Masonic lodges — 
more or leas spurious — have not only been used by 
Atheists and Revolutionists for their own sinister pur- 
poses, but also by their enemies. We learn from Robi- 
8oa that even the Roman Catholic Church at one time 
tried to capture them^possibly for ends not over- 
friendly to the Established Church in this country — 

' Oliver: "Hiatory of Masonic PeraeouUon," pp. 293-300. 



and that the Jacobites, who can scarcely be called 
enemies of the Throne and Altar, wore extremely active 
in the Masonic Order during the eighteenth century.', 

5. THE JEWISH authorship' Of""tHE TRENCH 

This is a pet theory of Mrs.' Webster, and is very 
I largely baaed on the untenable propositions noticed 
I above. It is, however, also sought to show that the 
I lUuminati and the Martinezists were active artisans of 
I the Revolution, and that they were abetted by Jews. 
I On this the only concrete evidence adduced la that 
I Martinez Paaqualia, who figured prominently in both 
I movements, was "generally reputed to be a Portuguese 
I Jew." As a matter of fact, there were scarcely any 
I Portuguese Jews at the time, and oven the distinction 
I between Old and New Christians in Portugal had been 
F recognised as obsolete and abolished by decree in 1768,' 
Pasqualis was probably as little — or as much — a Jew 
as Pombal or Dom Joseph in the popular anecdote.' 
As for his alleged Jewish abettors, it is noteworthy that 
neither Barruel nor Robbon — both contemporaries of 
I the Revolution— knew anything of them. Barruel, in- 
deed, ignored the theory when it wa.s actually suggested 
to him, and for good reason. No one knew better than 
he how ludicrous it was. The Jews in Paris at the time 
were few and relatively insignificant; they did their 

' RobiBon, op. «"!., pp. 30, 38-39, 62. 
•Smith: "Memoirs of Pombal," Vol. II,, p. 248. 
• Ihid.,fpp. 249-260. As s matter of fact Paaqualia 
ChriHtiaii bom at Grenoble (Waite: OccuU Rev., Sept., 191 


duty by the new Government, but were sturdily on the 
Bide of moderation, and so far from having had any 
hand in making the Revolution they were actually the 
last to benefit by it. They were, in fact, the only class 
of the population whose disabiUtiea were continued by 
the new regime, and it was not until September, 1791, 
that, after many appeals from them and in face of a 
strong opposition, the National Assembly consented to 
their emancipation.' As for their political opinions, 
they ai'e sufficiently illustrated by the fact that one of 
the first acts of the Terror was to arrest forty-six of them 
as suspect of "di51its contre-rfevolutionnaires " — the 
charge is itself a vindication — and nine of them were 
executed. ° None of these good people were of any 
political prominence. Indeed, whether for good or evil, 
not a single Jewish name figures conspicuously in the 
history of the Revolution. With the subsequent Rev- 
olutions of 1830 and 1848 the case was different, but 
these were essentially bourgeois movements, and the 
Jewish activity in them was characteristically middle- 
class and moderate. 

The general suggestion of the Morning Post that the 
Jewish Community is, for the most part, composed of 
dangerous Revolutionists is a little difficult to deal with, 
because, at the same time, it is admitted that they are 
not sincere. While preaching their subversive doc- 
trines they are said to be really anti-democratic, and 
to simulate a zeal for Atheism and Anarchy only in 
order to bring about the social and political Armaged- 

'Kfthn; Lea Juifa i Pom, pp. 64-71. ' Ibid., pp. 72-85. 




don out of which their own Davidic Autocracy ia to 
emerge and triumph. Everything, then, hinges on thij 
motive, and it has already been shown that it is nothing 
more than a millennial hope which has no place in the 
field of practical politics. The appeal to Karl Marx as 
the Archetype of the Jewish Revolutionist is, in this 
connection, particularly UDfortunat«, In the first place, 
Marx was not even remotely a Jew by rehgion, and 
therefore the Messianic motive is scarcely likely to have 
weighed with him. He was probably a sincere Revolu- 
tionist, and, in that case, he was just as little a Jew, 
seeing that his philosophy has no relation to any recog- 
nised school of Jewish thought. Marx, indeed, was an 
intellectual product of the essentially Gentile teachings 
of Hegel and Feuerbach. Perhaps the best test of the 
Gentilism of his outlook is that, while his Jewish disci- 
plea were comparatively few, his Christian converts are 
numbered in toilliona. In the second place, if Marx 
was the chief instrument of a Jewish plot to subvert 
Christian society, he must have proved something of a 
disappointment to his secret employers. Among the 
forces which are making for World Unrest to-day he is 
a relatively conser\'ative element. The Morning Post 
itself supplies the proof of this. In its anxiety to con- 
vict Marx of adding the sin of Germanism to the 
criminality of anti-Christian Thuggee — a little difficult 
to reconcile — it recalls his life-long quarrel with Bakou- 
nine, and explains it as exclusively a struggle between 
Judeo-Germanism and Slavism,' There is, however, 
no reason to beheve that it was at bottom Einythiug but 
a confli ct between Socialism and Anarchism — that ifl, 
^Momiim Post, July 18, 1920. 


between those who, however revolutionary they may 
be in a social sense, would still maintain the structure 
of the State, and those who would destroy it root and 
branch. Here we see that it is not the Jew Socialist 
who works to destroy the established poUtical order of 
things, but the Gentile Anarchist. This point may be 
still further illustrated by Syndicalism and Bolshevism, 
which are both far more destructive than Socialism and 
are both revolts against Marx. It is true that Lenin 
pretends to be a strict Marxist, but his orthodoxy b 
vehemently contested by all the leading Marxists in 
England, France, and Germany, and by the whole body 
of Russian Mensheviks, among whom are many Jews.^ 

It is impossible, within the restricted scope of this 
essay, to deal with all the incidental accusations against 
Jews contained in the Morning Post indictment; but 
most of them will be found covered by the above classi- 
fication. The charge of Bolshevism, which is the only 
conspicuous exception, will be examined in a later 

The upshot of the matter is that the "Formidable 
Sect" is a German Anti-Semitic and Anglophobe myth, 
founded in malice and hysteria, built up of garbled his- 
tory, and synthetised by impudent forgery. How it 
came to impose itself on the plethoric patriotism of the 
Morning Post is a mystery which may be worth investi- 
gating. Whatever the explanation, it must be counted 
a triumph for German junkerdom and a consoling token 
to that eminent traitor Herr Houston Chamberlain that 
he is not altogether without spiritual affinities in the , 
land of his birth. 
' Infra pp. 45-46. 


Chief among the pieces justificalives relied upon by 
the demonologista of the Morning Post ia an anony- 
mous pamphlet which calls itself "The Jewish Peiil."' 
As has been stated in the previous chapter, this pam- 
phlet is a forgery, or, rather, a garbled translation of a 
clumsy Russian forgery by a certain Sergyei NUua, 
intended to pander to the superstition of the "Hidden 
Hand." There is reason to believe that it has itSDif 
been engineered by a more substantial hand reaching 
out stealthily from the arcanum of German Militarist 

The literary and political history of this pamphlet ia 
quite easy to trace, though it has been a little obscured 
by its author's infirmities of memory. Fundamentally 
it belongs to a typo of forgery which was common 
enough in the 17th and 18th centuries, when party 
passions ran high and the reckless scurrihties of political 
warfare could not be made effective without the con- 
coction of bogus documents.^ In our own time this 
fraudulent traffic has become relatively rare, though the 
notorious Pigott and Dreyfus forgeries are there to 

' Lond., Eyre and Spottiswoode, Ltd., 1920, Moming Poet, 
July 16 and 17, 1920. 

'See Isaac D'lsraeli, "Curiositiea of Literature," Vol. III., 
pp. 143-160. 



show how easily it may be tempted into life when 
mahciouB controversialists venture on accusations 
which they cannot otherwise substantiate. This is 
precisely the case of "Professor Sergyei Nilua," the 
alleged author of the Russian original of "The Jewish 

His documented "discovery" that the Jews, in con- 
spiracy with certain secret brotherhoods, are at the 
bottom of all the pohtical and religious convulsions and 
all the social instabihties throughout the world, has 
been devised to bolster up a theory which has long 
failed to convince. The theory itself, of which the 
Morning Post's " Fonnidable Sect " is the latest product, 
is at least three centuries old. It was the staple of the 
pseudo-Apocalyptic literature of Antichrist and the 
Wandering Jew which assailed the early years of the 
Refonnation and filled the literary armoury of the 
League during the Thirty Years' War. It took more 
definite political shape in the tracts and broadsheets, 
afterwards collected by the German Evangelical 
Clericals under the title of Anabaptistiaim et Evihur 
siasticum Pantheon, which, among other fearsome 
things, explained the Puritan Revolution in England — 
the Bolshevism of its day — as a plot against Christi- 
anity and Monarchy contrived by the Qudcker, Frey- 
Geister und Heil- und Gottlosen Juden^ In the early 
eighteenth century its specifically anti-Jewish aspects 
were emphasised by the misapplied learning of Eisen- 
menger, whose anti-Semitic classic, "Entdecktes Ju- 
denthum," was pubhshed at the cost of King Frederick 

^ AnahaptUHcam, etc (1702). See partieulwly the tract en- 
titled ETsehrdekliefie Bruderachafft der AUen und Neuen. 



of Prussia.' After the French Revolution and the up- 
heavals of 1830 and 1848, a fresh impulse was given to 
the agitation. Meanwhile, the Illiuninati had come 
into existence, and Freemasonry had become known, 
and they were promptly annexed by the scaremongers 
and substituted for the Quakers and Freethinkers in 
their new redaction of the "Hidden Hand." A number 
of blood-curdling works deahng in minute detail with 
their supposed activities as authors of the Revolutions 
were published by such writers as Father Barruel 
(1797, etc.), the Chevalier de Malet (1817), Eckert 
(1854), Gougenot des Mousseaux (1860), Crfitineau- 
Joly (18fi3), Saint-Andrg (1880), and Chabauty (1883). 
These books all fell flat. The blood of the public 
refused to be curdled, and to-day they are only found 
in second-hand bookshops or in the libraries of col- 
lectors of Masonic and Occult ana. 

In 1868 an ingenious German named Hermann 
Goedache conceived the idea of galvanising the agitation 
into effective hfe by giving a dramatic form to all ita 
theoretical extravagances.^ Formerly in the Prussian 
postal service, where he also acted as a spy for the 
Secret Police and the Kreuz Zeitung party, he had been 
dismissed from his office for subornation of forgery in 
connection with the prosecution of the famous Demo- 

' Preface to Schieferl'H edition (Dresden, 1893). 

• As a matter of fact, he was not the firat worker in this field, 
though he was the first Uterary ancestor of NiluB. The idea of 
the dramatic treatment ot a Jewish conspiracy against Christian 
Society waa worked out by the Polish poet Krasainaky in his Nie- 
Boska Komedya ("The tJndivine Comedy"), published in 1834. 
It differs in scope and detail from Gaedsche, Ite attack on the 
Jews was strongly censured by Adam Mickiewicz. 




cratic leader Benedict Waldeck.' He was now engaged 
in palming off on the German public a series of apoc- 
ryphal works, half memoirs and half historical ro- 
mances, which he alleged were written by an English- 
man named "Sir John Retcliffe." They dealt with all 
the palpit-ating international political problems and 
events of the middle of the nineteenth century, from the 
Crimean War to the War of the Danish Duchies. In 
one of these romances, entitled "Biarritz,"' he touched 
on the economic question which had been opened in ita 
most formidable shape by the foundation of Lassalle'a 
Workingmen's Union and the publication, in the 
previous year, of Marx's "Das Kapital." This led him 
to a melodramatic Jewish interlude. 

Two of his characters, a Jewish Social Democrat 
named Li^ah and a scientific dreamer named Faust, 
overhear the proceedings of a secret assembly of the 
"Elect of Israel," held once in every century roimd 
the tomb of a mythical "Holy Rabbi" named Simeon 
ben Jehudah in the ancient Jewish cemetery at Prague. 
The conclave is pictured as engaged in the worship of 
the Golden Calf,* which, we are told, has been pre- 
served ae the profoundest mystery of the Jewish 
Cabala by which the Jews may eventually aecure their 

' Meyer'e KonveTsationa-Lexikon (1897), Vol, VII., eub. toe, 
Goedsche and Waldeck. Sknograpkischer Berichl aber die Ver- 
handbingen in der Anklage gegen Dr. Waldeck (Berlin, 1S40). 

• In four volumes, Berlin, 1868. 

' It WBfl a cufltom of some laediiBval German Jews to place the 
"firet fruits" of their cattle to grass in the eemeteriea. This 
gave rise to a popular belief that the idolatrous cultus of th^' 
Golden Calf Btill lingered among them. (Schudt: JMieche Merck- 
w^diskeiten (1714), Vol. II., p. 376.) 



dominatioa over all the nationB of the earth. The 
practical application of the principles of this cnltua ui 
diacuaaed in a long sfiries of cynical speeches, which are 
in close agreement with the hypotheses of Gougenot 
des Mousaeaux and similar writers. The Jews are to 
work with gold and the Press for the subversion of 
Christianity, and they are to act as a universal dis- 
turbing and demoralising instrmnent, so that in the 
fulness of time they may establish the Jewish Uni- 
versal Dominion on the ruins of Christian society. 
When on the stroke of midnight this uncanny con- 
venticle breaks up, Lasali solemnly pledges himself to 
his friend Faust to fight the hideous matcriahsm of his 
co-religioniats with the ideals of Social Democracy.' 

This was the editio princeps of a number of forged 
anti-Semitic documents, of which the Nilus Protocols 
are the latest redaction. They differ among themselves 
in detail, according to the varj'ing stages of the evolu- 
tion of the political and economic struggle, but in their 
broad lines they are constant to the original presenta- 
tion of their case by Goedsehe. 

The first forgeries, in which Goedsche's avowed 
fiction was transformed into protocols or reports of 
alleged Jewish confessions, were produced early in the 
eighties by the more irresponsible elements of the 
German anti-Semitic movement then in process of 
formation by Treitschke and Stocker in Germany, and 

^BiarriU, Vol. t., pp. 130-180. Further choxacteristic refer- 
cacea to the Jenish question will be found in a lat^r novel of the 
Retcliffe aeries entitled Um dU Wdtkerrachnft, Vol. I., pp. 30&- 
aiO, 338, 360, 416; Vol. 11,, pp. 55, 56, 63; Vol. III., pp. 127, 130; 
Vol. IV., pp. 190-191, 467; Vol. V., pp. 22, 83-84, 206. 


were widely circulated as broadsheets. In 1893 the 
same material was worked up simultaneously by two 
German anti-Semitic papers, the Deutsch-soziale Blatter 
and the Antisemitiscke Korrespondenz, and published 
aa an authentic speech delivered by a Jewish Rabbi 
at a secret meeting of his disciples held in the Jewish 
cemetery at Prague.* The source of this fabrication 
was placed beyond doubt by a thoughtless editorial 
statement that it was extracted from a work written 
by an eminent Englishman named "Sir John RetclifEe," 
and entitled "Memoirs of the Politico-Historical 
Events of the Last Ten Years." Needless to say, this 
book is as apocryphal as Reteliffe himself, the alleged 
speech being chiefly a condensed paraphrase of Goed- 
Bche's avowed fiction. There is, however, one im- 
portant deviation from the original which brings it 
nearer to the Nilua text, the Jews being pictured not 
aa divided into anti-Christian Materialists and So- 
cialists, but as being all simulators of Socialism and 
Anarchism for their own revolutionary purposes while 
Btill remaining, among themselves, devotees of the 
Golden Calf, with all its moral, or rather immoral, 
implications. In 1901 a literal Czech translation of this 
precious protocol, but without the acknowledgment of 
indebtedness to "Retclif?e," was published in Prague 
under the title "A Rabbi on the Goyim."* It was im- 
mediately confiscated by the police on the ground that 
it was calculated to disturb the peace, but the anti- 
Semites revenged themselves by incorporating the 

' BerichU Hber die 3 GeneralveraamTnlwig dei V^ein* zur Abwthr 
4b< Antieemitismui (Vienna, 1893), pp. 8, 9. 
* Hnbrow for "Gentiles." 



whole text in an interpellation to the Minister of Jus- 
tice, which was brought forward by the deputy Brzenov- 
eky in the Austrian Reicharath on March 13, 1901, and 
gave rise to a Lvely debate.' It was not heard of again 
until 1911, when it was translated into French — this 
time with the "Retchffe" acknowledgment — by M. 
Kalixt de Wolski, and published together with a 
reckauffi of the more notorious forgeries of Braafmann 
and Lutostansfcy.^ Finally, in 1912 the anti-Semitic 
Press in Germany repubUshed it in a new form. Instead 
of an alleged historical document, it now appeared as a 
piece of news — a stenographic report of a speech de- 
livered by a "Jewish Rabbi" at a Jewish Congress held 
at Lemberg.' Anyone who takes the trouble, however, 
to make the comparison will find that it is a textua! 
prids of the speeches made by the Golden Calf wor- 
shippers in Goedsche's "Biarritz." 

It is consoling to note that none of these scandalous 
fabrications made any durable appeal to the relatively 
sober mentality of those happy pre-war days. No 
reputable newspaper noticed them. Even M. Drumont, 
while appropriating all the theories of Gougenot dea 
Mousseaux in his "France Juive" — without acknowl- 
edgment, by the way — does not mention Goedache or 
any of his mahcious plunderers. 

Now it needs but a very cursory glance at these for- 
geries and their raw material in the treatises of the 
Uterary scaremongers to perceive at once the fraud 

^ StenagraphUche Protokolle de» Hautei der Ahgtordneten dei 
OeaterreickiKken ReicksrcUkea (1901), pp, 1282-1284. 
» Wolaki: La Russie Juive (Paris, 1911), pp. 7-19. 
' The test is quoted by Meiater; Judat Schiddbuch, p. 15S. 



which has been practised on the pubhc by Nilus's book. 
But before I press thia point home, let us see whether 
Nilus himself has any reasonable explanation to offer 
ef the provenance of his documents. It should be bora* 
in mind that these documents consist of a number of 
■o-called "Protocob of the Learned Elders of Zion," 
in which, as in the Goedsche romance, certain Jewish 
teachers are made to avow to theu" disciples the dark 
designs of Jewry for the corruption and subjugation of 
Christendom. Nilus does not refuse to say how he 
came by these Protocols. On the contrary he gives us 
no fewer than three explanations. Unfortunately for 
him, they are not only elusive and incredibly melo- 
dramatic, but they are also hopelessly contradictory. 
Two of them will be found in the English edition. 
According to one, the Protocols came from a deceased 
friend mmamed, who received them from a woman, 
also unnamed, who stole them from "one of the most 
influential and most highly initiated leaders of Free- 
masonry ... at the close of a secret meeting of the 
initiated in France." ' According to the other, there 
was no woman intermediary and no despoiled French 
Freemason, but the whole business was done by the 
deceased friend himself, who rifled the safes of "the 
Headquarter Offices of the Society of Zion in France."^ 
The inconsistency of these two stories may conceivably 
be explaiaed, but it is not so easy to account for the 
third story, which NiluB relates in a third and enlarged 
•dition of his work published in 1911. Here he tells us 
that the documents came not from France, but from 
Switzerland, that they were not Judeo-Masonic, but 
' "The Jowiah Peril," p. III. * Ibid., p. 8S. 



Zionist, and that they were the secret Protocols of the 
Zioaist Congress held in Basic in 1897.' From these con- 
flicting statements it is perfectly clear that Nilus is not a 
witness of truth, and the damaging conclusion suggested 
by a comparison of his Protocols with the Goedsche 
fiction and its progeny of forgeries becomes irresistible. 
The Protocols are, in short, an amplified imitation of 
Goedsche's handiwork adapted to the circumstances of 
the Russian Revolution of 1905. Whether it was made 
direct from the melodramatic text of "Biarritz" is 
doubtful. Had Nilus worked with that document his 
credulous mysticism would assuredly not have resisted 
its Golden Calf theory, of which he is refreshingly inno- 
cent. On the other hand, he does adopt the blending of 
the Materialist and Social Democratic elements which 
are separate and conflicting in Goedsche, but which, 
with the exclusion of the Golden Calf, were the chief 
points of difference between the Czech forgery of 1901 
and its Goedsche original. It therefore seems probable 
that it was with the Czech text that Nilus operated, 
and this is confirmed by his own avowal that the 
"manuscript" which first made him acquainted with 
the alleged Protocols was given to him in 1901, the year 
in which the Czech pamphlet was pubhshed.^ 

■ Berlintr Tagehlatt, May 18, 1920. The story is repeated with 
further variatioCH, in the fourth edition, published in 1917, ex- 
tracts from which are given in the Morning Post, August 12, 1920. 
In this edition Nilus quotes certain enigmatic etatements of tha 
late Theodor Herzl as proof of a secret Jewish teaching. It hap- 
pens that the correspondence with Herzl on this subject is in 
the possession of the present writer. It has nothing to do with 
a secret Jewish teaching. 

' Fourth edit., cap. III. {Quoted by Morning Post, Aug. 12, 



In his main ideas Nilua followed thie pamphlet very 
closely, but borrows, or, rather, purloins, additional 
matter, especially in regard to the FreemasonB, from 
Gougenot dee Mousscaux. He also annexes political 
and economic ideas on a large scale from modem Rus- 
sian reactionary writers and from certain early Bol- 
shevist programme-mongers. How closely his main 
thesis follows that of the Czech-Goedsche pamphlet is 
shown by the following parallel, in which both explain 
how the Jews hope to accomplish their fell purpose by 
simulating sympathy with the proletariat and leading 
it into destructive, and eventually suicidal, political 
revolution : — 



"Our people are conserva- 
tive, faithful to the rebgioua 
ceremoniea and customs 
which have been bequeathed 
to ua by our anceators, but 
our interest exacts that we 
should simulate a zeal for the 
social questions which are 
the order of the day, espe- 
cially those which deal with 
the amehoration of the con- 
dition of workmen In re- 
ality our eSorta should be 
directed to capturing tliis 
movement of public opinion. 
The blindness of the masses, 
their propensity to yield 
themsclvea to oratory as 
empty aa it is sonoroua. makes 
of them an easy prey and & 


"We intend to appear aa 
though we were the liberators 
of the labouring man come to 
free him from hia oppression, 
when we shall suggest to bitn 
to join the ranks of our 
armies of socialists, anar- 
chists, and communists. . . . 
We govern the masses by 
making use of feehnga of 
jealousy and hatred kindled 
by oppression and need, . . . 
When the time comes for our 
Worldly Ruler to be crowned 
we will see to it that by the 
same meana — that is to say, 
by making use of the mob— 
we will destroy everything 
that may prove to be an 
obstacle in our way. . . . The 



populace in its ignorance 
biindiy believes in printed 
words and in erroneous de- 
lusions which have been duly 
inspired by ua. . . . The mob 
is used to listen to us who 
pay it for its attention and 
obedience. By these means 
we shall create such a blind 
force that it will never be 
capable of taiing any de- 
cision without the guidance 
of our agents placed by ua 
for the purpose of leading 

docile instrument of popu- 
larity and credit We shall 
find without difficulty among 
our own people the expression 
of Bueh factitious sentiments 
and as much eloquence as 
sincere Christians find in their 
enthusiasm. We must as 
much as pos^ble sustain the 
proletariat and bring it with- 
in the reach of those who 
have money at their disposal. 
By this means we shall be 
able to rouse the masses 
whenever we please, to lead 
them into upheavals and 
revolutions. Each of these 
catastrophes will advance by 
a long stride our own racial 
interests and will rapidly 
bring us nearer to our one 
great end — that of reigning 
over all the earth as it haa 
been promised to us by our 
Father Abraham." 

It would be easy to quote many other equally deadly 

parallels, but this one will assuredly suffice to show that, 
in their main argument, at any rate, the Protocols are 
not what they pretend to be — that is an actual state- 
ment of secret Jewish teaching by a Jew — but that 
they are not even an echo of Jewish ideas, seeing that 
they are derived from a Gentile forgery baaed on a work 
of confessedly Gentile imagination. 

When we examine Nilus's added matter the revelation 

' The Jewish Peril," 


" pp. 12, 13, 14, 32. 



of fraud becomes still more remarkable. The main dif- 
ference between Nilua and his German and Czech fore- 
runnera is that he works out in detail the alleged 
Autocratic and Bolshevist philosophy of his Elders 
Zion. He pictures these fabulous personages as genu- 
ine beUevers in Autocracy, but more intent on Jewish 
pohticEil domination than on merely mercenary exploi- 
tation. Accordingly, he attributes to them the design 
of practising a sort of State Bolshevism when their 
domination shall have been accomplished — that is to 
say, the creation of a paternal Jewish autocracy basing 
itself on a carefully controlled communistic system. 
It is by this ingenious device that be endeavours to 
ehow that the Jews are the arch-enemy at both extremes 
of the social organism. 

Now, whence comea the autocratic philosophy he 
puts into the mouths of his Jewish Elders? It is ex- 
clusively a Russian doctrine. Nilus knows this very 
well, and he does not waste time in the hopeless task of 
finding counterblasts to democracy in Jewish pohtical 
literature. He goes straight to the fountain-head of 
Russian obscurantism in the person of the late Pro- 
curator of the Holy Synod, Konstantine Petrovich 
Fobyedonoszeff! This expedient has the appearance 
ahuost of a practical joke, for Fobyedonoszeff was 
not only a pure Muscovite and a fanatical Greek 
Christian, but so conspicuous an anti-Semite and 
oppressor of Jews, Stundists, and other Russian 
allogenes that he earned for himself the sobriquet 
of "the modern Torquemada." Nilus's Jewish Anti- 
christ is, in short, nothing more than the austere 
super-Christian Procurator masquerading, like Edward 


ed I 


u- I 



AUeyn's Barabae, in a false nose and a prodigious 
property beard. 

The evidence of this jumps to the eyes if we take the 
trouble to compare the first part of "The Jewish Peril" 
with Mr. Robert Crozier Long's translation of Pobys- 
donoBzeff's "Reflections of a Russian Statesman,"' 
aepecially the chapters on "The New Democracy" and 
"The Great Falsehood of our Time." Many parallel 
passages might be quoted, but it will, perhaps, suffice if 
I extract one, fundamental to both writers, in which 
Nilus makes the Jewish Elder plagiarise the argument 
of the Christian Procurator, in part ahnost textually : — 


"Forever extending ita 
base, the new Democracy 
now Bspirea to universal suf- 
frage. By this means, the 
political power would he shat- 
tered into a number of infini- 
tesimal bits, of which each dti- 
zen acquires a single one. 
What will he do with it then; 
how will he employ it? . ■ . 
Each vole representing an in- 
considerabU fragment of power, 
by itself signifies nothing. . . . 
The extension of the right to 
participate in elections is re- 
garded as progress, and as 
the conquest of freedom by 
democratic theoriEta who hold 
that the more numerouB 
the participants in x>oliticEtl 
rights, the greater is the 

' Lond., 1898. 

"It suffices to give the 
populace self-government for 
a short period for this popu- 
lace to become a disorganised 
rabble. . . , Is it possible for 
the mass to discriminate 
quietly and without jeal- 
ousies to administer the 
affairs of State? Can they 
be a defence against a for- 
eign foe? This is impossible, 
as a plan broken up into as 
many parts as there are minds 
in Ike mass loses its value, and 
therefore becomes unintelligi- 
ble and unworkable. Alone 
an autocrat can conceive vast 
plana clearly, assigning ita 
proper part to everything in 
the mechanism of the nia> 
chine of State. Hence ws 




probability that all will em- conclude that it is expedient 
ploy this right in the inter- for the welfare of the country 
eets of the public welfare, that the Government of the 
Experience proves a very dif- same should be in the hands 
ferent thing. The history of of one responsible person, 
mankind bears witness that Without absolute despotism 
the most necessary and fruit- civilisation cannot exist, for 
ful reforms emanated from civilisation is capable of 
the supreme will of states- being promoted oniy under 
men or from a minority en- the protection of the ruler, 
lightened by lofty ideas and whoever he may be, and not 
deep knowledge,' and that, on at the hands of the masses".' 
the contrary, the extension of 
the representative principle 
is accompanied by an abase- 
ment of political ideas".' 

In the eecond part of "The Jewish Peril," where the 
Elders of Zion are made to expound their State Bolshe- 
vism, the sources are not quite so clear. It is practi- 
cally certain, however, that they are not Jewish, Had 
Nilus waited a few years he would, perhaps, have been 
able to quote convinced Bolshevist writers of Jewish 
birth like Radek and Zinovieff, but when he wrote in 
1905 there were no such exponents of pure Leninism. 
The great split of 1903 found all the leading Russo- 
Jewish Socialists, such as Martoff, Axelrod, Trotsky, 
Martinoff, Liber, Dahn, and the whole of the Bund, 
ranged with the Mensheviks against Lenin.' The re- 

' PobyedoaoMeff; "Reflections" (English edit.), pp. 2C, 27, 
23. Allowance must be made for the different styles and quali- 
ties of the two tramlatioiis. 

' "The Jewish Peril," pp. 2, 5. 

' Mautner; Der BoUcheteiam'ut (Stuttgart, 1920), p. S5. See 
also Landau-Aldanov: Lenine (Paris, 1920), pp. 31-32. It is 
amusing to note that the Morning Post (July 21, 1920) counts 
almost all these Jewish Mensheviks as Bolsheviks. 



suit was that, in reproducing Bolshevist ideas, Nilua 
must have been dependent on Gentile pamphleteers. 
It is not easy to identify these ephemeral writings with 
certainty, but many interesting paralleb of this section 
of the Protocols may be found in Bucharin's "Pro- 
gramme of the Communists," which codifies all the early 
Bolshevist literature.' And Bucharin, be it noted, is 
just as little a Jew as was Pobyedonoszeff. This, of 
course, explains the alleged prophetic character of the 
Protocols which the Morning Post and its friends hold 
to be convincing evidence of their genuineness. If the 
Bolsheviks have acted on some of the principles attrib- 
uted the Elders of Zion, they have done so not be- 
cause they were of Jewish origin, but because they were 
exclusively the work of Lenin and his bodyguard of 
Gentile proletarians. 

So much for the literary history of the Protocols. 
Theii- political history b not less discreditable. They 
were not published because they were discovered — 
whether in the pages of Goedsche or elsewhere — but 
they were discovered because they were wanted for the 
ignoble purpose of a pogrom-weapon. In the first edi- 
tion of his book, pubUshed in 1901, Nilus knew nothing 
of them, but was absorbed by the more abstract aspects 
of the problem of Antichrist. In 1905 occurred the 
Russian Revolution, and this was followed by the in- 
cendiary conspiracy of the Okhrana to stir up pogroms 
all over Russia and drown the new Constitution in a 

' The date of the original Russian edition ia unknown to the 
present writer, but a German edition was published at Zurich in 


welter of Jewish blood.^ Nilus appears to have been 
employed by the Okhrana in this wicked campaign. At 
any rate, the Protocols first appeared at this date in the 
shape of small pamphlets or broadsheets and they 
were only afterwards collected and incorporated in a 
second edition of Nilua's work as a dinoucmeTit of his 
theory of the Judeo-Maaonic nature of Antichrist. Nor 
has their rdle as a pogrom-weapon been confined to the 
year 1905. Quite recently abstracts of them were 
widely circulated in Deni Inn's and Koltchak's armies. 
They were printed in the Eparchial Library at Rostoff, 
and were distributed by the remnants of the organisa- 
tion of Black Hundreds known aa the Union of the 
Russian People. How effective they were for their 
murderous purpose we know from the horrible massacres 
of inoffensive Jews and Jewesses which dogged the foot- 
steps of Denikin's annieB throughout South Russia. 

But this was not the only sinister movement with 
which the Protocols seem to have been associated. The 
year in which they were first pubhshed in Russia was 
also the year of a very serious Russo-German intrigue 
against the Triple Entente; and here again these Pro- 
tocols — or, rather, their argument — appear as one of 
the main weapons of the plotters. 

It will be remembered that in July, 1905, the basis of 
an anti-British Alliance was secretly agreed upon by 
the Tsar and the Kaiser at Bjoerkoe.' A few monthi 

' S^^DOff: "The Ruaiiui Oovenunent ftnd tha MajuaorM" 
(Lond,, 1907). 

"■The Nikky-Willy Correspondence," Timet, Sept. 4, 1917; 
DaUy Tdegra-ph, Sept. 4, 27, and 29, 1917; and Morning Post, 
Sept. 16, 1917. 


later, while the Treaty was still incomplete, Count 
Lamsdorf proposed to the Tsar that advantage Ebould 
betaken of "the new friendly relations" with Germany 
to conclude an agreement between the two countries 
for combating the alleged Jewish and Masonic peril,' 
Now, the secret Memorandum in which this precious 
scheme was set forth, and which the Tsar formally 
approved in January, 1906, is virtually a reproduction 
of the anti-Semitic argument which the alleged "Proto- 
cols of the Elders of Zion" are designed to prove. It 
is true that the Protocols themEclves are not mentioned, 
but Count Lamsdorf is none the lees positive, with the 
fabricators of those documents, that the Jews are the 
soul of the Revolutionary movement in Europe, that 
their "principal aim is the all-aroimd triumph of anti- 
Christian and anti-Monarchist Jewry," that their mill- 
ionaires subvention this movement with "gigantic 
pecuniary means," and that they are abetted in this 
enterprise by the Freemasons. The Protocols are, in- 
deed, little more than a dramatic version of Count 
Lamsdorf's Memorandum. It is difficult to resist the 
conclusion that in some occult way— perhaps not so 
very occult— Nilus'a book was intended to serve the 
sinister ends of the pro-German foreign policy of Count 
Lamsdorf in the same way as it served the bloody pur- 
poses of the pogrom-mongers. It should be especially 
noted in this connection that the book is as anti-British 

' For Russian tcrt of Count LamBdorf'e proposal see Vol. VI. 
of "Secret DooumentB," published by the Soviet Commissariat 
of Foreign Affaire. An English tranalation with an introduction 
■ppeara in Wolf: "Diplomatic History of the Jewish Question" 
(London, 1619), pp. 54^2. 


as it is anti-Jewish, and that it was published in De- 
cember, 1905, that in to say, at the very time that the 
Tsar iiad the Lamsdorf scheme under consideration. 

The more recent history of the Protocols is even more 
unsavoury. It is incredible, but it is nevertheless a 
fact, that these crazy forgeries have played a part 
beliind the scenes in the international combinations for 
assisting the anti-Bolshevist reaction in Russia, which 
have filled so much of the pubUc mind during the last 
two years, and which have cost this comitry close on 
£100,000,000. There was a moment when the Great 
Powers were disposed to leave the Russians to fight out 
their quarrels among themselves. Various objeetiona 
to this policy were urged by the friends of Admiral 
Koltchak and General Denikin, and among them was 
the argument that there was, in fact, no civil war in 
Russia, that Bolshevism was not Russian, but exclu- 
sively alien, the work of international Jews who were 
themselves the instruments of a world-wide and deep- 
laid Jewish conspiracy against Christendom and the 
political order of Europe. Bolshevism was, in short, a 
European menace. Russia was pictured as the first 
instalment of the Jewish conquest of Europe, which 
had already sent its ficlaireurs to Berlin, Dresden, 
Vienna, and Budapest, whence they were advancing 
to the Rhine and the Alps. In support of this argu- 
ment, Russian Intelligence Officers, armed with doc- 
tored typewritten translations of the Nilus Protocols, 
with the anti-British passages carefully expunged, were 
Bent to London, Paris, Rome, and Washington, where 
they circulated this precious literature confidentially 
among Cabinet Ministers, heads of public departmento, 




and persons of influence in society and joumaliam. 
That this campaign was not fruitless is attested by 
many curious facts, which, unfortunately, cannot be 
more particularly referred to at this moment without 
a breach of confidence. Overt evidence of the mischief 
that was wrought is, however, not wanting. It may be 
found, for example, in certain oracular utterances of 
Mr. Winston Churchill in a Sunday paper, in the anti- 
Semitic outbursts of the Morning Post, and the itching 
of the Times and the Spectator to do hkewise, and, 
finally, in the discreditable propaganda leaflets dis- 
tributed in the interior of Russia by the air service of 
the British armies at Archangel and Murmansk.' 

Why the Protocols were circulated thus secretly is 
clear. Their poHtical purpose had nothing to gain, 
and, indeed, everything to lose from public criticism and 
discussion. Nevertheless, they leaked out. A copy got 
into the hands of ao official of the United States 
Department of Justice, and he, anxious for further 
information, and following Bome tactics office rule, 
sent it to the President of an important Jewish organ- 
isation in New York for his observations. The Presi- 
dent promptly replied that it was a forgery of a very 
familiar type, and took no further notice of it. In June, 
1919, the present writer, while in Paris, heard of the 
circulation of the Protocols aa a pogrom pamphlet in 
Denikin's country, but he also attached no special im- 
portance to it. Later on came the first intimation of 
the proposed publication of the Protocols in Western 
Europe. It came in very characteristic shape. One 

• These leaflets were very promptly withdrawn aa soon as the 
attention of Hia Majesty's Govetnment was called to them. 


day the members of a certain Jewish Delegation in 
Paris received a visit from a mysterious Lithuanian 
who had been connected with the Russian Secrat 
Police. He professed himself anxious to serve tht 
Jewish community, and said that he was in a position 
to prevent the publication of an exceedingly dangerous 
book, which, if it saw the light, would probably involve 
the whole house of Israel in ruin. Quite naturally, he 
wished to be paid for this service, but the sum was a 
mere trifle, a matter of £10,000. He was asked for a 
mght of the volume, and he produced it. It was, of 
course, "the Protocols." Needless to say, no business 
was done. It was possibly only a coincidence that in 
the following December a German edition was pub- 
lished under the title "Die Geheimnisse der Weisen 
von Zion," and two months later the English edition 
saw the light under the title "The Jewish Peril: Proto- 
cols of the Learned Elders of Zion," The German and 
English pubhcation would have been simultaneous but 
for the fact that difficulty was experienced in finding 
a reputable London publishing house to take the 
Protocols seriously. 

One further word about the English edition. Its 
history and aims are much less clear than those of its 
Russian original, owing partly to the circumspect 
anonymity in which its sponsors have elected to veil 
themselves. It is inconceivable that it is intended to 
stir up pogroms in this country, though the suggestion 
ifl not obscurely made in recent articles in the Times 
and the Spectator. More probably — as has already been 
hinted — it is part of a German intrigue to prejudice the 
recent German general elections in favour of the 



Militarist Reactionaries and perhaps even to justify the 
forcible upsetting of the Gennan Government by- 
means of another Kapp Putsch. Here b the evidence for 
this startling conjecture. 

The German Reactionaries have lately been putting 
all their money on anti-Semitism. Their pubhcity 
agencies in Charlottenburg and Munich have flooded 
the country with pamphlets denouncing the Republican 
Government as a Judaized Junta, the instrument of a 
far-reaching Judeo-Masonic conspiracy to ruin Ger- 
many and to involve the whole of Christian and Mon- 
archical Europe in her fate. This campaign has lately 
become official, and a paragraph was inserted in the 
Electoral Manifesto of the German Nationalists — the 
party of Kapp and Lutzow — formally adopting anti- 
Semitism as a plank in their platform. One of the 
aims of the party is to secure foreign sympathy and 
help, and they hope to do this by finding a common 
ground in anti-Semitism. In these circumstances the 
pubUcation of "The Jewish Peril" in England wears a 
disturbing significance, but it becomes much more 
disturbing when we find that the German edition was 
published almost simultaneously with it, with a dedi- 
cation appealing not only to the German people, but 
also to "The Princes of Europe," The object was 
clearly to get English support, and unfortunately the 
response was not long in coming. On May 8th the 
Times was inveigled into publlsliing an article express- 
ing alarm at the revelations of the Protocols and calling 
for an investigation. The delight of the German Reac- 
tionaries knew no bounds. It was voiced by Count 
R«vttatIow in & long article in the Deutsche Tagea- 


zeiiung of Biay 17 wdooming tiie Tmei's aeeqitanee of 
the Jewish peEQ as an indicatkHi that KntfJi public 
opimon was beguming to reoogniae the li^btooasncflB 
dl Kapp and Co. in their lesistanoe to tiie Ebeii 
rtgime and what the Count called the "pax Jndaeica." ^ 
Whether the translators and editors 61 "The Jewish 
Peril " have consciously lent themselves to this intrigue, 
which is part of the German Beactionaiy plot to iq»et 
the Treaty of Versailles and perhaps phrngs Europe 
into another war, cannot be said. But assuiedly the 
worst suspicions are permissible so long as these gentle- 
men elect to skulk in the coulisses and shrink from 
responsibility for their scrubby handiwotk. Even 
Titus Oates had the com^e of his forgeries. 

^Besides Count Reventbw's article see a very lif^tpgnring 
arUde entitled "Reventlow und die Weisen von Zion" in the 
Berliner TageblaU, May 18, 1920. 

The final argument of the anti-5emitic acaremongera 
is the Judeo - Bolshevik bogey. The Morning Post 
theory of "World Unrest" may prove difficult of 
assimilation to matter-of-fact minds, and the authen- 
ticity of the Nilus Protocols may be suspect, but the 
Bolshevism of the Jews is asserted to be an incon- 
trovertible fact, which proves that both the theory and 
its documents are morally justifiable. Were it not for 
its very tragical possibihties, the evocation of this 
bogey would be a fit subject for mirth, or, at best, a 
problem for the folk-loriat or the student of corporate 
hallucination. As it is, it is a very serious matter, 
seeing that the fives of many thousands of innocent 
persons are jeopardised by it. 

The bogey takes the specific form of a chai^ against 
the Jews of Russia and Poland that they are for the 
most part Bolsheviks, and that the Bolshevist revolu- 
tion was engineered by them and is still controlled 
and directed by them.' The only evidence cited in 
Bupport of it is that Trotsky and a few of the more 
prominent Bolshevist commissaries are men of Jewish 
birthj and that a similar element on an even more 

^ Morning Post articles on "The Cause of World Unrest," 
pOBfsiirt. See particularly July 21, 1920. 



restricted scale ia found in certain of the Soviets. But 
those men are no more Jews than Lenin, Lunacharsky, 
Chicherin, and the great bulk of the Russian Bokhe- 
viks are Christians, It would, indeed, be just as reason- 
able to say that the mainstay of Russian Bolshevism is 
to be found in American and British Christendom 
because it has found sj-mpathisers in Mr. BulUtt and 
Mr. Stcffens, in Mr. Goode, Mr. Price, Mr. Russell, Mr. 
Ransome, Mr. Hunt, and many other Americana and 
Englishmen of Christian birth. 

The appearance of the bogey at this moment ia not 
difficult to understand. There has always been at the 
back of the anti-Semitic mind an mieasy feeling that 
the Jews are, as the old law books say, perpetui immid 
Regis el Religianis. Their participation in the bour- 
geois Revolutious of 1830 and 1848 gave political point 
to this superstition, and ever since it has been a favour- 
ite theory of the more fanatical reactionaries that the 
whole Democratic movement in Europe is a Jewish 
conspiracy for the subversion of Christianity and 
Christian society. In this respect the Morning Post 
theory is, as has already been shown, not new. In 
Russia it became early an expedient of reactionary 
tactics. To denounce revolution on its merits was 
difficult, but to denounce it as a Jewish conspiracy 
against the Throne and the Altar was always calcu- 
lated to impress large classes of the population who 
otherwise might not have been indisposed to look in- 
dulgently on a great political change. This was the 
cue of all the incendiary appeals of the Okhrana against i 
the Rev olution of 1905.' 

' SfmSuoff, op, cit, 


Thus, when Bolshevism arose, it was quite in the 

line of traditional Russian policy to denounce it aa the 
work of the Jews. From the reactionary camps of 
Deoiken and Koltchak, and even from the Allied armies 
in the North, where the Intelligence and Propaganda 
Services were necessarily in the hands of Russian 
officers of the old Tsarist rigime, the country was flooded 
with pamphlets and broadsheets declaring that Bol- 
shevism was a Jewish plot, and that the aim of those 
who were making war on it was not to fight their Rus- 
sian brothers, but to deliver them from their Jewish 
bondage. It was, however, in Germany that the bogey 
was adapted for consumption in Western Europe. 
The old Junker anti-Semitism received a great impulse 
from the collapse of thrones which followed the Armis- 
tice of 1918. AH the revolutionary movements were at 
once attributed by them to the Jews, and, by way of 
showing the victorious Allies the danger they were 
courting by tolerating them, bloodcurdling pictures of 
Russian Bolshevism as the first fruits of an interna- 
tional Jewish conspiracy were issued from the presses 
of the anti - Semitic society known aa Deutackland's 
Emeuerung, in Mimich.^ A circle of Russian Mon- 
archist refugees in Berlin founded a weekly paper 
called The Sunbeam to help in the holy work. It was 
in the columns of this journal that translations of 
extracts from Nilus's forged Protocols first appeared.^ 
Early in 1919 the themes of these imbecile ephemeridea 

' The chief membera of this Society, which is as Anglophobe as 
it ia Judeophobe, are a brother of General Von Below and the 
reaegEide Houston Stewart Chamberlain. 
^S. FoliakoS in La TrOmns Juive {Paxis), No. 21. 





were gathered up and co-ordinated in bulky volumi 
by Baron Hans von Liebig,' by Dr. Friedrich Wichtl 

and by a person calling himself "Wilhelm Meister."' 
These ivritera were the final artificers of the bogey as 
we now know it, Trotsky being represented in their 
pages as the conscious instrument not only of the 
Jewish Rabbinate and of Jewish finance, but also of the 
secretly Judaised Masonic Lodges. A curious restate- 
ment of this apocalypse will be found in an anonymous 
pamphlet, entitled "Le Bolshevisme," which was 
printed in Paris last year by the Jesuits of the Rue 
Garancifere.' The French, however, have been very 
loth to touch this unclean product of German Kultur. 
We need only glance at the leading tenets of the Bol- 
sheviks to realise how stupid all this is — indeed, how 
impossible it is that Bolshevism should find even 
appreciable measure of sympathy in the Jewish coi 
munity. Lenin, Trotsky, and their associates are not 
only extreme Communists, but are also avowed Athe- 
ists. On the other hand, the great bulk of the Jews of 
Russia are extremely orthodox members of the Syani- 
gogue, who hold in horror every symptom of Atheism. 
The strength of this element was recently estimated by 
M. Paderewski himself at 75 per cent. In their eco- 
nomic affiliation these Jews are not less hostile to Bol- 
shevism. They belong in an overwhehning proportion 
to the upper and middle-class bourgeoisie. Moreover, 
the Jew is instinctively and by all his traditions an 

' Der Belrug am Devlscken Volke (Munich, 1919). 
• Suj^a, p. 6. 

' It provoked an excellent reply by "Un Russe" entitled £ 
ckevieme el Jitdaisme (Faria, 1919). 



upper and middle classes in Jewry are probably free 
from Bolshevism, this is not the case with the Jewish 
proletariat. If not orthodox Jews, they certainly pro- 
fess a strong Jewish nationalism, and if from them 
Bolshevism draws its main strength, then Jewry must 
bear the responsibility. On this point, happily, very 
definite information is available. First, with regard to 
the leaders. Bolshevism was fomided in 1903, through 
a split among the Russian SoeiaUsts, which took the 
form of a revolt against Leniu. Who led the revolt? 
The Jew Martoff, and he was supported by all the most 
conspicuous Jews in the party, including Trotsky him- 
self.' They were followed by the great bulk of the 
rank-and-file of so-called Jewish Sociabsts, How true 
this is, can be shown by an analysis of the Leninite 
party fourteen years later. In the autumn of 1917 the 
Bobheviks themselves published a statistical analysis 
of the constituents of the Soviets, with special regard 
to their geographical and ethnographical distribution. 
It was there shown that the Bolsheviks had a clear 
majority over the Menaheviks, or non-Bolshevist 
Socialists, and that they were far more largely com- 
posed of pure Russian elements than the Mensheviks. 
Their greatest strength was found in the districts of 
Petrograd, Moscow, the Baltic Provinces, the Volga, 
the Ural, and Asiatic Russia, where the Great-Russian 
working masses dominate. On the other hand, the 
Mensheviks were almost entirely confined to the western 
and south-western provinces, the Don district, and the 
Caucasus, where the chief non-Russian races are found. 
Here the return for the Jewish Pale of Settlement 
> Mautaer (p. 95) &nd Londau-Aldanov (pp. 31-32), op. of. 


that is, the provinces in which 95 per cent, of the Jews 
of Russia and Poland reside — is most significant. The 
number of organised Mensheviks ia given at 18,000, 
while of organised Bolsheviks there is no trace what- 
ever in the whole region. The other non-Russian dis- 
tricts in these provinces were less fortunate, for in the 
south-western governments the proportion of Bolshe- 
viks to Mensheviks was 8 to 11, in the Don district 
18 to 29, and in the Caucasus 1 to 5. The statistics 
here, however, show clearly that the strength of Bol- 
shevism was always in an inverse ratio to the strength 
of the local Jewish population.* 

Another important piece of evidence is to be found 
in the attitude of the Jewish "Bund," which is the 
main organisation of Jewish workmen in Poland and 
the Pale of Settlement. From the beginning of the 
Ru^an Revolution the "Bund," avowedly Socialist, 
threw all its strength on the side of the Mensheviks. 
The most passionate struggles in the Congress of Soviets 
in 1917 were those waged between Lenin, on behalf of 
the Bolsheviks, and Liber, the "Bund" leader, on 
behalf of the Mensheviks. Liber and his colleague 
Dahn were at that time among the staunchest sup- 
porters of the policy of the Entente in Russia. To this 
day the great majority of the members of the " Bund" 
have remained anti-Bolshevist in doctrine, although 
under the pressure of the administration and for other 
political reasons which have appealed equally to many 
ex-Tsarist generals and Christian Conservatives, they 
have lately pledged their allegiance to the Lenin rigime. 

' Report of the Ckimiiiissar tor National Economy reprinted 
from the Noimya Shisn in the Bote (Stockholm), Dec. 6, 1917. 


Id political thought they are still numbered among the 
moBt ardeut supporters of the great coalition of Russian 
Meusbeviks, which has it^ headquarters in Stockholm, 
and — another significant fact — is captained by a Jew, 
the well-known Socialist writer Paul Axelrod. There 
are probably quite as many Jewish leaders in the anti- 
Bol^evist coalition as there are Jewish Commissaries 
among the Bolsheviks. 

Nor are the upper and middle-classes of Russian and 
Polish Jewry merely passive spectators of the struggle. 
Politically they belong in an overwhelming proportion 
to the moderate Liberal party known as the Cadets, 
and many of them are active in the councils and Press 
of that party- The present leader of the Cadets, who 
succeeded Professor Mihukoff, after his unhappy but 
temporary defection from the cause of the Entente, ia 
the distinguished Jewish lawyer M. Vinaver, equally 
conspicuous for his devotion to his co-religionists and 
the cause of ordered liberty in Russia. Admiral Kolt- 
chak and General Denikin, in spite of their compromis- 
ing anti-Semitic associates, had no more strenuous sup- 
porter and no wiser counsellor than M. Vinaver. 
Another eminent Jew who may frequently be seen in 
consultation with MM, Sazonoff and Maklakoff at 
the Russian Delegation in Paris is Baron Alexandre 
de Gunzburg, at one time the most conspicuous mem- 
ber of the Jewish Conmiumty in Petrograd, 

The anti-Semitic impression that Bolshevism ia 
brgely Jewish is, however, not altogether a bad dream, 
but rather an optical delusion wliich has been mali- 
ciously exaggerated. The so-called Jewish Bolshevika 
are, indeed, a corps of officers without an army, and the 


anti-Semitea have a little too hastily inferred the army. 
Even then these officers are not of the first rank. We 
have heard a great deal of "Jewish Commissars," and 
I find a notorious German anti-Semitic book quoting 
Mr. Robert Wilton, of the Times, as its authority for 
the statement that "of 384 People's Commbsars who 
constitute the Government only 13 are Russians, while 
300 are Jews."' What are the facts? The only 
officials in Soviet Russia who are authorised to hold 
the rank of People's Commissars are the members of 
the Cabinet.* These number 17,' and of them 16 are 
indisputably Gentiles, while only one — Trotsky — is of 
Jewish birth. And Trotsky, be it remembered, is a 
Jew who has publicly abjured the Jewish and all other 
religions, and who is so httle a Jew in other respects 
that at the Socialist Congresses at the beginning of 
the century he led the cosmopolitans in denunciation 
of the Jewish Nationalism of the Bund. To describe 
Russian Bolshevism as Jewish because one member of 
Lenin's Council of People's Commissars is an apostate 
Jew is obviously ludicrous. Lenin might far more 
justly describe the anti-Bolshevism of Western Europe 
as Jewish because two years ago the French Cabinet 
contained one professing Jew and the British two. 
The other so-called Jewish Commissars are all men of 
the second and lower ranks of officials belonging ex- 
clusively either to the Civil Service or the Soviet 
analogue of our municipal life. They are probably 
fairly numerous, but in what may be called the second 

' Meister, op. ciL, p. 192. 

' "Conatitution of the Russian Soviet Republic," Article 48.' 

> Ibid., Article 43. 



individualist. It has been possible to found under the 
Igreat names of Lamennais, liingsley, Maurice, Hughes, 
3 Ketteler, and othera a school of Christian Com- 
■mumsm seeking its sanctions in the teachings of or- 

■ tiiodox Christianity. No such school in the strictly 
■'economic sense exists or is possible in the Jewish 
■Church. Marx and Lassalle ceased to be Jews long 

■ before they became Socialists, and, in so far as the 
I Jewish proletariat which has arisen in Russia and Po- 
I land imder the stress of exceptional and ephemeral 
I conditions is Socialistic, it is notoriously remote from 
I the Synagogue — as from every other kind of "cleri- 
\ cahsm" — and impatient of its control. 

But, it ia said, the Jews must be held responsible for 
I Bolshevism because Bolshevism is only apphed Marx- 
ism, and Marx was a Jew. I have already pointed out 
that, strictly speaking, Marx was not a Jew, but, even 
supposing he were, that would not make Bolshevism a. 
Jewish creation, seeing that in point of fact it is, in its 
mnirt lines, not even Marxist. There is so much loose 
thinking on this question that it may be well to indicate 
— however briefly — the fundamental differences be- 
tween the teachings of Marx and Lenin. In the first 
place, Mai-x was a Democrat, wiiile Lenin is con- 
fessedly an Oligarch, Democracy is axiomatic with 
Marx, the foundation of ah his doctrine, Lenin, on 
the other hand, derides the mere counting of heads. 
He is, as he would put it, for the supremacy of truth, 
whatever the number of its disciples, Tliis vital differ- 
ence affects the systems of the two men at all essential 
points. Thus, while Marx teaches that the Dictator- 
ship of the Proletariat should be the outcome of a 


Democratic Republic based on Universal Suffrage, 
Lenin rejects Universal Suffrage, and bases the Dicta- 
torship on a Guild or Soviet Republic. Again, Marx 
stands for Revolution by Law in all Democratic States, 
while Lenin stands for Revolution by Force, whatever 
the constitution of the State. Nor does this apply only 
to revolutions, for wliile Marx holds that the anthority 
of the State must, whenever possible, be exercised by 
peaceful means, Lenin teaches that Force is inherent 
in the State and its exercise unavoidable. This leads 
Lenin to the view of Robespierre that even the Terror 
is in a sense mystically sanctified — a view of which 
Marx never dreamt in his most daring moments. 
Finally, contrast the conceptions of the State as set 
forth by the two men. Both, of conarse, are for the 
State, but while Marx pictures it, after the decision of 
the Class War, as composed of the whole Democracy 
seeking the conciliation of its conflicting elements, 
Lenin would confine it to the Dictatorship of the Pro- 
letariat, even though the other classes might be in the 
majority.^ There is, of course, much to be said for 
both theories within the ring-fence of Socialist polemics, 
but I am not concerned at this moment with their re- 
spective merits. All I want to show is that Marx can- 
not be held responsible for Bolshevism as we know it, 
and that if the alleged Jewishness of Bolshevism rests 
on the theory that it has any essential affinity with 
Marxism it is singularly unconvincing. 

The case against the bogey is, however, not limited 
to these generalisations. It may be said, while the 

' Seo on this subject the elaborate analyaia of the two 
in Mautaer, op. cit., pp. 120-296. 




rank they do not number more than ten at the outside.' 
The others may or may not be convinced Bolsheviks. 
They are servants of the State who may have many 
other motives for serving the Soviets than an enthu- 
dasm for Lenin's politics, Not every head of a Gov- 
ernment Department or Chairman of a County Council 
in England is to-day necessarily a Lloyd Georgian. 
Trotsky has in his War Office and Corps of Officers 
probably as many ex-Tsarist officers — including six- 
teen Generals' — aa there are "Jewish Commissars" 
in the whole Soviet Administration. And yet nobody 
dreams of describing the Red Legions as a Tsarist army. 
These officers are probably not even Bolsheviks. If we 
could know their motives we should probably find that 
they were not very widely different from those which 
actuate the "Jewish Commissars," 

All this is not to say that there are no professing Jews 
in the Bolshevist ranksj or that the number of indif- 
ferent and apostate Jews who have thrown in their 
lot with the Soviets is quite negligible. What is con- 
tended is that normally the Jew is intensely anti- 
pathetic to Bolshevism, and that at the beginning of 
the Revolution relatively very few Jews — even of those 
who are Jews by race only — rallied to the call of Lenin. 
That this situation has changed during the last year 
is not improbable. But with whom does the blame 
rest? If Jews have reluctantly turned towards Bol- 

' As the result of a eareful analysis M. Poliakoff gives their 
names as foilowa: Zioovieff, Radek, Sverdloff, Steklof-Na- 
khamkee, Litvinoff, Larine, Kamene£f, Ganetzki-Furatenberg, 
Joffe and Ounitzky. Of these two are dead and one is only a 
half-Jew (La Tribune Juive, Dec, 26, 1919). 

* lUd, gives full list. 


shevism, it is because they have been forced into it by 
the anti-Bolsheviks. They cannot but be alarmed by 
the persistency and passion with which the charge of 
Bolshevism is levelled at them, and the threats which 
come from all sides to avenge in their persons the sins 
of Lenin and Trotsky. They have had a bloody in- 
stalment of this St. Bartholomew in the pogroms of the 
Polish borderlands and the Ukrainian plains. What 
wonder, then, if some of them — and they can only be 
relatively very few — turn for protection to the Soviets, 
especiaUy in the lands where the Soviets rule? Never- 
theless, their aversion from Bolshevism in theory and 
practice remains, and is, indeed, for the great majority 
of them insuperable. 

One word in conclusion. If some of the charges 
against the Jews which have been examined in the fore- 
going pages were not so utterly unfounded as they 
prove to be, ample explanation and excuse might be 
found in the high and sustained tragedy of Jewish 
history. When in 1848 Ludwig Boeme was reproached 
by a poUtical colleague with the excessiveness of his 
revolutionary zeal, he rephed: "I was bom a slave, 
and hence I love freedom better than you do." Twenty 
centuries of a terrible oppression has made of the Jews 
in Europe an element of no small importance in all the 
struggles for popular Lberties, but throughout it all 
they have aJways remained a relatively conservative 
force. This is most strikingly exemplified by their 
career in the Russian Revolution. Human nature being 
what it is, it would not have been surprising if all the 
Jews in Russia had become fanatical Bolsheviks. The 
extravagances of Bolshevism are the natural reaction 


against the cruelties of Tsarism, and the Jews suffered 
more bitterly from those cruelties than any other sec- 
tion of the sorely tried Russian people. And yet their 
innate moderation — what Disraeli rightly diagnosed as 
their ineradicable attachment to Religion and Property 
— has prevailed, and even among the lower classes, who 
were proletariatised and driven to Socialism by the in- 
famous May Laws,^ Bolshevism has found only few 
and reluctant recruits. The Jews, no doubt, have their 
defects, very much in the same way as Christians, but 
what Mr. Gladstone once called "incivism" is not one 
of them. 

* See Prof. A. V. Dicey's introduction to "The Legal Sufiferings 
of the Jews in Russia'' (Lond., 1912). 

rtasTBD m tks unitbd statbs or auebica.